Characterizing the Effectiveness of Developmental Education: A Response to Recent Criticism

Community College Research Center, Columbia University Pub Date : 2013-02-28 DOI:10.7916/D857191J

Thomas R. Bailey, S. Jaggars, Judith E. Scott-Clayton

{"title":"Characterizing the Effectiveness of Developmental Education: A Response to Recent Criticism","authors":"Thomas R. Bailey, S. Jaggars, Judith E. Scott-Clayton","doi":"10.7916/D857191J","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the past several years, the Community College Research Center (CCRC) has conducted several research studies on developmental education and has produced reviews synthesizing the results of our own work together with that of colleagues from other research organizations. In a recent issue of the Journal of Developmental Education, Alexandros Goudas and Hunter Boylan (2012) aimed several criticisms at this body of work, with the key claims being that: (1) we unfairly portray developmental education as ineffective because it does not lead to outcomes better than those of collegeready students; (2) we ignore several studies showing positive results; and (3) we overgeneralize from results that are only valid for students near the developmental cutoff scores. These three claims are woven into a broader critique that we have “cherry-picked” negative results, neglected methodological problems with the studies yielding such results, and ignored positive results in order to advance our own reform agenda and, in particular, to support the notion of co-requisite developmental education.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"60","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D857191J","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 60

Abstract

Over the past several years, the Community College Research Center (CCRC) has conducted several research studies on developmental education and has produced reviews synthesizing the results of our own work together with that of colleagues from other research organizations. In a recent issue of the Journal of Developmental Education, Alexandros Goudas and Hunter Boylan (2012) aimed several criticisms at this body of work, with the key claims being that: (1) we unfairly portray developmental education as ineffective because it does not lead to outcomes better than those of collegeready students; (2) we ignore several studies showing positive results; and (3) we overgeneralize from results that are only valid for students near the developmental cutoff scores. These three claims are woven into a broader critique that we have “cherry-picked” negative results, neglected methodological problems with the studies yielding such results, and ignored positive results in order to advance our own reform agenda and, in particular, to support the notion of co-requisite developmental education.

查看原文本刊更多论文

发展性教育的有效性特征:对最近批评的回应

在过去的几年里，社区学院研究中心(CCRC)进行了几项关于发展教育的研究，并综合了我们自己和其他研究机构的同事的研究结果，发表了一些评论。在最近一期的《发展教育杂志》(Journal of Developmental Education)上，Alexandros Goudas和Hunter Boylan(2012)针对这一工作提出了几项批评，其中关键的观点是:(1)我们不公平地将发展教育描述为无效的，因为它不会带来比大学毕业生更好的结果;(2)我们忽略了一些显示积极结果的研究;(3)我们过度概括了只对接近发展分数线的学生有效的结果。这三种说法被编织成一种更广泛的批评，即我们有“精心挑选的”负面结果，忽视了产生这些结果的研究的方法问题，并忽视了积极的结果，以推进我们自己的改革议程，特别是支持共同必要的发展教育的概念。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Community College Research Center, Columbia University

自引率

0.00%

发文量